Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Data Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents question data-center ordinance’s size and environmental limits during Colleton County hearing
Summary
At the second reading of Ordinance 25-0-10, a resident warned that the proposed changes to allow national data centers lack a maximum size limit and could have environmental and water-use impacts; the council held the reading and did not record a final vote.
Council members heard public comment Oct. 6 on Ordinance 25-0-10, a second-reading amendment to Title 14 (Land Management) that would add a national data center use to the county’s zoning code.
Kathy Sturgis, who identified herself as a resident of Longleaf, raised environmental and community concerns, saying the draft ordinance contains setback, height and buffer rules but lacks a square-footage or maximum-size limit for data centers. “They use a lot of water. They take down trees,” Sturgis said. She urged the council to consider long-term impacts on water, air and tree cover and questioned whether jobs created by such facilities justify the land-use trade-offs.
Sturgis also referenced examples elsewhere, saying some communities have seen heavy local impacts from data centers’ on-site generation and infrastructure. She asked the council to reconsider whether the county should adopt the proposed changes and warned of potential negative outcomes if scale and environmental protections are not specified.
Council members did not engage in extended debate on the record at that time. The ordinance was presented for second reading and a motion and second were recorded in the meeting minutes; no final adoption vote was read aloud in the transcript for that item.
Council materials show the ordinance text in the packet and the council chair asked members to review the highlighted provisions under article 14.04.060 and related sections. The presentation on the agenda identified the item as a second reading. Because the transcript does not record a final vote or a specific amendment to add size limits during the session, the council’s action is recorded here as second reading held and no final vote specified.
